Angela Levin: Prince Harry should give up his title for being anti-terrorism!

Anzac Day Service of Commemoration

The royal commentary people are the boys who cried wolf, writ large. Over the years, they’ve freaked out over every single little thing, turned minor incidents into huge controversies, and turned family disagreements into near abdication. One of the best examples of this is their collective hysteria over Prince Harry and Meghan “talking politics.” Last year, Harry made a pretty normal statement about how people should reject hate speech. It was barely notable, and I barely thought about it when I first heard it. But the royal commentary class spent WEEKS criticizing Harry for his “political” statement which, they said, was clearly part of some anti-Donald Trump agenda.

More than a week ago, Prince Harry’s interview with Fast Company came out. It was full of interesting comments about online life, developing better ethical standards for the digital world, and encouraging people to stop engaging with social media. At one point, Harry made a reference to the January 6th insurrection, which was a white supremacist terrorist attack against democratically elected leaders, all of which had largely been organized and incited online. The terrorists were largely radicalized online too. Harry said: “We have seen time and again what happens when the real-world cost of misinformation is disregarded. There is no way to downplay this. There was a literal attack on democracy in the United States, organised on social media, which is an issue of violent extremism.” When I read that, I thought “wow, I wonder if they’re going to ding him for being ‘political’ again.” Guess what?

Prince Harry should “drop all his titles” and become a US citizen if he wishes to have the “freedom” to voice political opinions, a royal expert has said. The Duke of Sussex spoke out against the Capitol riots in Washington, which took place just two weeks before Donald Trump conceded to Joe Biden. He called out for reforming social media after the deadly events and described the storming of “a literal attack on democracy.” The Royal added that there is “no way” to “downplay” organised “violent extremism” on social media.

Royal author Angela Levin said Prince Harry should “droll all his titles and take American citizenship” if he wishes to have the “sort of freedom” that allows him to speak on political matters. She told : “If he wants this sort of freedom he should drop all his titles and take American citizenship. Of course having his titles has enabled him to do various lucrative deals but he can’t or shouldn’t have it both ways. I think Harry’s decision to lecture anyone on how to live, what to do and who to vote for is a misjudgement. And even more so in the United States.”

Ms Levin added that Prince Harry should especially not speak out as “a member of the Royal Family” who is still “using” his Royal titles.

[From The Daily Mirror]

“I think Harry’s decision to lecture anyone on how to live, what to do and who to vote for is a misjudgement…” Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, has basically been saying “fascism is bad, hate speech is bad, violent extremism is bad and be aware enough to avoid being radicalized online.” And Angela Levin is other-siding him! Levin is like “you can’t tell violent terrorists how to live if you still have your title!!” That’s really how those fussy old bitties think. It feels like they’re starting to realize that they sound like a–holes, and that they made too many mountains out of molehills though – it’s just sad-sack Angela Levin saying this now. Piers Morgan and the other online fascists are screaming about other things.

Britain's Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex completes a trade as he attends the 15th annual BGC Charity Day, in London, Wednesday, Sept. 11, 2019. The day is held each year by BGC Partners to commemorate the 658 Cantor Fitzgerald and the 61 EuroBrokers emp

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

129 Responses to “Angela Levin: Prince Harry should give up his title for being anti-terrorism!”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Rare0217 says:

    Whew…If working too hard to be upset about nothing was a’s Angela

    • SpankFD says:

      Bravo, Rare0217

      My take is that Angela defends the social hierarchy at all cost — which includes muzzling calls for democracy and eliminating hate speech. She needs to maintain the social pecking order, especially marginalizing BIPOC, because the royals lack the ability to survive let alone thrive in a meritocracy. She’s an attack dog for an out-of-touch, calcified social hierarchy. It is her bread-and-butter, amiright?

      • Rare0217 says:

        I think that’s a perfect summation. As a woman of color it’s fascinating to see the mental gymnastics it takes to d
        eny reality. My soul is weary.

      • (TheOG) Jan90067 says:

        I’d think she or SOMEONE would realize that NOT speaking out about “the peasants’ uprising” could lead to the monarch being toppled by the same over there (see France/Marie Antoinette/Louis XIV for reference).

      • RoyalBlue says:

        Bravo, SpankFD.

    • Lorelei says:

      I just love how these people are constantly giving themselves away — Harry did not “tell people who to vote for” — IIRC, he and Meghan urged people to vote, and spoke out against hate. So of course everyone in the entire world took this to be an anti-Trump comment, because obviously.
      But Harry never referenced Trump, and she’s just giving away the fact that when hate was mentioned, of course he was obviously talking about Donald Trump. SHE is the one who made that connection publicly, not Harry. Such an idiot.

  2. Becks1 says:

    “and even more so in the United States” – well let me tell you about the US currently, Ms. Levin. We are extremely divided right now and we have the people who think what happened on January 6 was no big deal and it wasnt terrorists or insurrectionists, and then we have the sane people. And somewhere in the middle you have the people like McConnell, who know exactly what it was but wont come out and say it. Harry’s comments – which were not controversial here at all -are on the right side of history. So sit down and shut up.

    • TheOriginalMia says:

      What Becks1 said.

      Levin needs to worry less about what Harry & what he’s doing and saying and more about the “real royals” and their activities.

      • Still_Sarah says:

        Levin’s point is that royals don’t offer a personal opinion on politics because they could be seen as trying to influence how the government acts. Historically royals WERE the government and now their job is to be ceremonial and not be a perceived rival to the government. Harry and Meghan giving up their titles would put them clearly in the realm of private citizens who could say whatever they want. It would free them up to be completely private citizens which seems to be what they want. IMO their royal titles tie them to a way of life that never worked for them. I don’t see why they don’t renounce them and cut the final tie to the BRF.

      • TheOriginalMia says:

        @Still_Sarah, Levin’s point is irrelevant because Harry & Meghan aren’t working royals. They aren’t representing the Queen. If they were still in the UK, still working for the Queen, then they would live by those rules. When the BRF kicked them to the curb, they lost the right to tell Harry & Meghan what they can and cannot do. Harry & Meghan are private citizens. They aren’t using their titles for anything.

      • sara says:

        Surely you’re not actually this stupid Sarah? Royals have ALWAYS had political opinions and meddled in political affairs. The queen and Charles and Andrew are intertwined with the government. And if you think saying “hey domestic terrorism is bad” is a political statement you are beyond help.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        Other than Charles, Anne & Sophie, do the “real royals” actually have any activities?

        Other than Charles, do the “real royals” actually have any activities that the general UK public is interested in? I am willing to bet that the Commentariat of the Daily Fail are not interested in “real royals” and their activities or there would be massive daily media coverage on what Lady Louise Windsor wore to school each day and how much each outfit cost.

      • Still_Sarah says:

        @ theoriginalmia : thank you for your reasonable tone. I appreciate it. if you look at their public statements or any time they are mentioned on social media, their titles are used every time. So I would say they are using their titles constantly by virtue of that. That’s why I said they should give them up – it would get rid of their final connection to the royals. Even if they are non-working royals, their titles tie them to the BRF.
        @ Sara : name calling isn’t a rebuttal. Attacking someone with insults (“you are beyond help”) isn’t a rebuttal. I can reply to theoriginalmia but I can’t do much with what you said.

      • Nyro says:

        They are already private citizens. They no longer live off of the taxpayer. They left the fold as working royals. Or did you muss their farewell tour back in March 2020? Harry is a private citizen living and working in the United States. His title is not recognized here and he’s free to say whatever he wants about the goings on in the country he lives in and pays taxes in.

      • Becks1 says:

        They are private citizens. Having a title does not mean they are not private citizens – I think a lot of aristocrats in the UK would be dismayed to find out that they were not private citizens if that was the case.

        There are two main points to unpack, and the first is that the royals ARE political. Their very existence in the UK is political.I forget the specifics, but Norman Baker laid it out in his book – how the Queen gets to approve any bill that would affect her before it even gets to parliament for debate. how is that not political? The fact that they get money through the sovereign grant is political. The fact that the queen has hundreds of millions of pounds – maybe more – and hides it away in offshore accounts – is political. the fact that Charles pays income tax on the Duchy of Cornwall “voluntarily” is political. the fact that Charles is an advocate for climate change is political. William’s recent statements about racism were political (weak, but political.) and so on. the notion that “being political” essentially only means “vote for X person or Y bill” is something that has been pushed forward and its just wrong.

        So royals are really political all the damn time, its only when its Harry that its a problem.

        The second thing is – calling a terrorist attack a terrorist attack is not political. Its just stating a fact. If Harry made a statement about the terrorist attack on 9/11, no one would say that was political. Saying that they organized on social media and social media fed the flames of the conspiracy theory (that Trump actually won) is stating a fact. Its not political. Saying “its political” only benefits the Republicans and Trumpers who are shouting for “unity” because they know they supported a terrorist attack. If Harry made a statement about the terrorist attack on 9/11, no one would say that was political.

        And quite frankly their titles are used because its easier to say “prince harry” than to say “harry Mountbatten-Windsor.”

      • Carmen-JamRock says:

        It is perplexing that folks who wish to be considered decent, sane and sensible ……you know, NOT a member of the carnival barkers…….would nevertheless mouth the same disingenuous piffle as the carnival barkers.

        Theres nothing about his royal heritage, unfortunately, that H could “give up” that wd free him from the reality that he is a prince and member of the british royal family and, by extension, his Wife, Meghan, as arcane, calcified, ridiculous and anachronistic as it is.

        Except for his death.

        Is that what you and the carnival barkers not-so-secretly desire, @Still_Sarah?

      • bloemheks says:

        People keep throwing around this idea H&M can just renounce their titles as if it’s no big deal. From everything I’ve gathered this just isn’t true. The Queen can remove the HRH patent, but removing the rest requires Parliament. There is no current law by which Parliament can make the recommendation the titles be removed to the Queen, which is the only way they can be removed. Currently, the only legal grounds to remove their titles is treason which would mean the UK would have to be in an active war and H&M would have to be actively assisting the other side.

        I guess they could create a new law that any royal who formally requests their titles be removed through abdication would automatically have the removal recommended to the Queen with little discussion, but that would seem to create problems for the Royal family if it created a sense that the public could just apply pressure and demand abdication based on public opinion rather than hard and fast legal criteria. It’s okay for Charles to apply political pressure, behind the scenes, but not okay for non-working royals to make fairly innocuous statements in public about a domestic terrorist attack and encouraging people to participate in the democratic process, something that used to be non-controversial in the free world no matter who said it about any country, not just their own. It’s not in the Royal family’s best interest to make abdication easier or removal of titles based on much broader legal criteria.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        ” It’s not in the Royal family’s best interest to make abdication easier or removal of titles based on much broader legal criteria.”

        It definitely is not in the best interested of the Royal Family to start “un-doing” titles. I may be wrong but when one of the Connaught Princess married a commoner, George V did not take her title away but simply as her not to use her Royal Style & Title but to use her husband’s name and rank. The Princess of Connaught agreed with no problems. The Sussexes have agreed NOT to use their HRH. The Media Carnival Barkers are inventing problems, just making up stuff and serving porky pies to have something to bark about.

      • Nic919 says:

        Beatrice showed up to Boris Johnson’s celebratory party after he won the election, which is a clearly partisan move so I look forward for this non working person with an HRH to renounce it because her act was political and partisan.

        Meghan as an American has a right to tell people that they should vote in the US election. That telling people to vote is interpreted as partisan is just part of the GOP delusion. This wouldn’t be considered partisan in any other country, even by the conservative parties.

        Finally the Queen gave her opinion for the first referendum in Scotland and she is the monarch so that was a partisan and political move.

        Nothing Harry has said gets close to being partisan or interfering and Meghan either. There is no need for them to denounce their titles or HRH because they have done nothing that warrants it.

    • Lorelei says:

      And the thing is, even if they did give up their titles, these people would just find something else to wield at them as a weapon. They bitched and bitched about Frogmore, so the Sussexes paid it all back, but the harassment didn’t stop, they just moved on to something different.
      The same thing would happen if they gave up their titles. They would twist that into an “insult to the Queen” or some nonsense (even though they are the ones literally calling for it to happen), and the attacks would continue.
      They’re not going to stop the abuse no matter what, so Harry and Meghan are smart to just live their lives without trying to placate these people.

      There are now people whose entire careers are essentially based on trashing the Sussexes for the British population. Think of the names of all of the people we never knew existed until the smear campaign started.
      Finding something, anything, to attack Harry and Meghan for so that they can keep churning out stories that will generate clicks is in entire industry at this point. It’s beyond disgusting and pathetic but I don’t know how or when it will change because it makes a lot of money for a lot of people.

      • @Lorelei. You are right . They will keep digging for dirt to throw at the Sussexes. Nothing will suffice. It will be never ending. So why give these whiners what they want ? These carnival so-called experts are just salty because they lost that round with Archie’s birth certificate. They are riled and were shamed in front of the whole world for their lies and racist attack of Meghan. Now they want their pound of flesh— clowns Angela Levin, P.Morgan and the royal Rota lot.

      • L4frimaire says:

        @Lorelei, Entirely agree. So they take away the titles, then what? Are the press going to leave them alone then and play nice? I’ll wait for hell to freeze over first.

  3. Elizabeth Regina says:

    Poor love. Her obsession knows no bounds. Please focus on the royals left in that cesspool. Harry is free to say what he wants, when he wants and to whom he wants. Just because the orange in chief who was part of your hounding strategy lost the election is not Harry’s fault. Long may you live to continue seeing the Sussexes succeed, old woman.

  4. Lemons says:

    British citizens, I am very sorry, but you* are no longer allowed to speak on politics, not even in your own country. Angela has spoken so it is now decreed.

    *Queen Petty, C&C, Willileaks & Co., and the other one are excluded from this, though in actuality, their political opinions don’t make the news rounds.

  5. Snuffles says:

    Unfortunately there are a lot of royalists that think exactly like Angela. They are thoroughly brainwashed. I was watching a clip on Twitter where a couple of normal British citizens were taking the piss out of a royalist who was practically having a mental breakdown after hearing about Harry stepping down. He was utterly convinced that Harry would not only know how to exist outside the royal bubble but was going to have a mental breakdown as soon as he left.

    I’ve come to the conclusion that these people, the royal family, the courtiers, the RRs and the staunch royalists have been inside their own little echo chamber for so long, they don’t know what real life or real people are like. Like those guys said, the royal family don’t live in modern times. They are living in the 1500s.

    • Ana Maria says:

      I agree with you! they are all coming undone(the royal family, courtiers, press, etc); they are tripping over themselves because they are afraid to lose their job or source of income

    • bloemheks says:

      After my sister got her PhD in mathematics she did a post doc at U Penn with a very meager salary. It was a horribly sexist environment and she was often close to tears. The reason I bring it up was that most of the people in academia are similar to the royals in that they can’t understand why anyone would choose not to stay in the toxic ultra-competitive bubble. You’re supposed to feel so honored to get to work on cutting edge ideas that you don’t care if senior fellows treat you like crap and you’re 30+ years old still living as a pauper. They were in utter dismay when she quit and took a job in the private sector for a quarter-million dollar salary. In their minds, she was and is a failure, a sell-out, and can’t possibly be happy. In reality, she is thriving which just doesn’t compute for them.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        “that they can’t understand why anyone would choose not to stay in the toxic ultra-competitive bubble.”

        With regards to Meghan & Harry, it is difficult to compete if they cut off your legs and tie your hands behind your back.

        @bloemheks – Congratulations to your sister.

      • Ginger says:

        These royal reporters spend their whole life writing articles on how “amazing” and “wonderful” it is to marry in the RF. They can’t comprehend a blood royal and his Hollywood actress to leave themselves. No matter how successful they become the royal reporters will try and make Harry and Meghan into failures.

      • Lorelei says:

        @Bloemheks I think that’s actually such a great comparison. This kind of thinking goes on all the time, but we just see it more with the BRF since it’s on such a grand scale and so public.

        But you’re right that a lot of people have that mindset, and people like Harry and Meghan, who don’t appropriately “respect” the way things are done, in their opinions, scare them and it comes out as bitterness and contempt toward those who buck the system. They’re views as threats.

        What people like these royal “experts” don’t realize is how absolutely archaic and laughable they sound outside of their tiny bubble of hardcore royalists, to the rest of the world, in 2021.

  6. chocolate princess says:

    This is why I don’t comment on the publications of the British or any European Royal Family. The reason…. it really boils my blood that these people couldn’t find anything better in their spare time instead all they do is to smear The Duke and Duchess Sussex for making positives for everyone’s lives. Oh… and don’t get me started on the Royal Family itself. Ugh…

  7. L84Tea says:

    As if on cue, here comes the “take away his title” talk again. So predictable, these clowns…

    • BayTampaBay says:

      @Snuffles and @L84Tea – And what irks me is that these Royal Reporters, Royal Commentators, the Commentariat of The Daily Fail and other assorted garden variety Royal Hangars-on do not understand that QEII can only take away the “style” of HRH which the Sussexes are not using anyway.

      If the Royal Reporters, Royal Commentators, the Commentariat of The Daily Fail and other assorted garden variety Royal Hangars-on want the “title” of Duke of Sussex removed then they need to contact their MP or Boris Johnson as only Parliament through a Parliamentary Bill can remove or “attain” the “title” Duke of Sussex.

      UK CBers chime on in and please explain how a true Royalist would not know how all this works and why said true Royalists seems to be too lazy (or too stupid) to Google and/or consult Wikipedia to find out.

      I know this is really bad and poor taste on my part but I do take some comfort that there appears to be just as many wackos in England as there are in the USA. Definitely makes me feel we CBers are all in this messy world mess together.

      • Killfanora says:

        BatTampaBay, a Brit here. Tbh most of us totally ignore royalty as life is far more important. There are bigger things to think about than a sheltered, archaic institution that really wouldn’t be missed if it disappeared. They are viewed as harmless old relics of a bygone age most of the time, until there is a scandal like Andrew. Then polls then start showing such a dip in popularity and republicans start clamouring to get rid rid of them so the royals run to the newspapers for help. There is definitely a symbiotic relationship between royalty and media. They need each other to survive.
        But newspapers like the Daily Fail and the Scum are not representative of the thinking of ordinary Brits by any means. And the “polls” they produce, and the bots they use for readers’ responses are twisted to support the bilge that these rags generate. There is a huge love for Harry and his family and a deal of sympathy for their situation in this country. But of course that would not be reported for obvious reasons! Crap sells. Loving kindness not so much, sadly.

      • SarahCS says:

        Hi BayTampaBay I was going to answer your question then saw the great answer Killfanora has already given and I second this. I occasionally see a royal mentioned on the BBC new app but that’s about it, I get all my royal gossip on here and just don’t come across it anywhere else. There is a small and loud group who are in the BRF/BM bubble and get all angry in the DM comments section and then you have society at large wondering where the economy goes from here and how soon we can vaccinate our way out of lockdown.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @Killfanora – Thanks for your clarification. I have three very good buddies in southeast England, The Midlands and Norfolk. They have each told me the same thing as you. The like and respect QEII and as separate issue not connected to QEII support a Constitutional Monarchy with an elected Parliament as they want no chance of President Johnson, President Blair or a President Trump as a Head of State.

        As my good buddies have told me many times, a Constitutional Monarchy with an elected Parliament works fine no matter who the monarch is and no matter whether the Monarch is “good” or “bad” at the job.

      • L84Tea says:

        @BTB, I think at the very least the RR do know that about the titles, but it’s one of the only sticks they have left to try and beat H&M with. They lost their Frogmore stick, their taxpayer stick, their HRH stick, their “Charles is paying for your fancy life” stick, and all the other sticks. I think this is all they have left to moan and groan about because they are determined to only have bad things to say about H&M, never ever good things. As for the commentators, they might not know and be too lazy to do their research, but I think most of them do know and just want to stew in their ignorance over it because it’s more fun for them to be angry at H&M and have something to harp on them about.

      • Harper says:

        Lately, I’ve been thinking that the Royals continue to unleash the wackos on Harry not because Harry cares anymore, because he obviously doesn’t, but instead to show William that this is his future too if he ever considers checking out of the Firm.

      • Lorelei says:

        @Harper, that’s an interesting theory. I don’t know if they’re doing it intentionally or not, but that’s definitely the message William must be getting.

        On the other hand, he’s so arrogant with an ego the size of Texas, he might think he’s so “special” that he would never be subject to such treatment.

  8. Persephone says:

    Aren’t these carnival of so-called experts tired yet? It must be exhausting having to comment on EVERY LITTLE THING M&H do or say.

    • Amy Too says:

      I have a theory that the Sussex statement chose the word “carnival” because it sounds like “cabal,” which is something that people have been calling the rota for a long time.

      • donna says:

        Actually, @Amy Too, I think the Sussexes’ word selection of “carnival” is far more clever.

        Remember that radio fool who cartooned Archie as a chimp mere hours after his birth. When many pointed out the racist insult of this comparison, the fool tried to claim he was commenting on the media circus surrounding Archie’s birth.

        The RF did not make any public objections or offer the Sussexes any support and although the guy was fired, he was quietly re-hired.

        This is the Sussexes dropping the circus tag where it belongs.

      • Carmen-JamRock says:

        “Carnival of so-called experts” is, i think, a nod to President Obama’s bitchslap to drumf when he referred to him as a “carnival barker.” Thats why u see many in the #sussexsquad “going there” and shortening it to “carnival barkers.” Also, i think M&H’s team didnt want to “go there” and use the full phrase: “carnival barkers” ooooohhhhhh that would be too direct and you know the brit sensibility cant handle anyone being too direct.” They prefer “gentle suggestion” and “kindly asked” and “stated mildly” & other euphemisms, with their pretentious, disingenuous, lying *ss.

    • Over it says:

      Do you know the beauty of Meghan and Harry calling them a carnival of so- call royal experts? All these stupid people are always been called on by other legitimate media organizations to give their views. By Harry And Meg saying this, no one will be taking them seriously anymore. At least I really hope so

  9. CommentingBunny says:

    Harry – There’s no way to downplay this.
    Angela – Challenge accepted!

  10. Alexandria says:

    Angela Levin and the carnival are just stomping on the ground like goblins while we are laughing at them. Oh and UK citizens you are not allowed to have political opinions and freedom of speech! Did she tell William the same when he was bored of racism (in sports only of course according to those clever Cambridges stans).

    Come on take their titles I DARE YOU. They’re not going to give them up because they have done NOTHING WRONG. Angela Levin you racist. Come here and read this. You’re racist. Who’s next!

    • MF1 says:

      Yep, I really appreciate that H&M aren’t voluntarily giving up their titles. The queen is going to have to come and take them, which will be a deeply shameful, ugly act for the royal family, especially since Andrew retains all his titles.

    • BayTampaBay says:

      “Did she tell William the same when he was bored of racism (in sports only of course according to those clever Cambridges stans).”

      Did she tell William the same thing when William made the racist joke about The Indian takeout food delivery dude?

      • My Two Cents says:

        Will is turning into quite the Statesman, last year started with the Covid joke in Ireland, then him actually getting Covid and helping out the nation by covering it up so not to worry anyone, then he had this Indian takeout joke somewhere in between, I actually didn’t hear about the ‘bored with racism’ line, but hey, I’m not surprised. He’s the Ringleader of this caravan, the real Big Clown, on top of being a total loser. Imagine his anger when the person who types his Twitters for him, pressed send, and instead of glowing praise and global adoration, he got shit on by most of his commentators and it got ignored even by the footballer he was trying to defend! If Karma ever had a moment, this was it!

      • Lorelei says:

        Harry comes across as much more “statesmanlike” than William does, imo, for whatever that word is worth. William might be wearing expensive suits and have the team of gold standard advisors by his side, but imo he personally just doesn’t have any gravitas.

        However, when Harry talks, people listen.

      • dreamchild says:

        It seems to me that Harry et al are living history. Would it even matter if they gave up titles up to and including the Queen, Charles, William? Folks would still refer to them as Queen, Prince, Duke whatever. They will never stop being referred to as those titles. Even if they all abdicated, would anyone ever refer to them as former Queen, Prince, etc. I don’t think people would and I will just speak for myself that I would never call them former. This is just their place in history. For instance, no one calls Princess Diana….former Princess Diana. This is just who they are. Bless their hearts :).
        They are kinda stuck with it.

  11. Mooshe1 says:

    Can everyone remind Levin of all the broke royals selling appearances at dinners, books, and milk? Those titles (even HRH’s ask the York girls) mean NOTHING. Harry is the only blood royal who’s successful worldwide. H&M are popular because of who they are, their fans rarely use those stupid titles

  12. Osty says:

    That ugly wig stalker believes in her messed up head that harry belongs to her, she will use every opportunity to insert harry in everything. I wouldn’t be surprised if she has a shrine dedicated to harry like piers has for Meghan
    And if they think he has done something unworthy of those titles them they should go take it away from him

    • Yoyo says:

      Saw her in an interview talking about Harry, after he spend 15 mins talking to her, I kid you not I swear the woman was having an orgasm.
      She acts like a bitter ex-wife.

      • Snuffles says:

        Exactly. She’s acting like she lost the best dick she ever had.

      • ABritGuest says:

        I saw a clip where Richard Eden owned up about missing the Sussexes (more like the leaks & their being in England to be harassed)& commented that he felt like he was watching them being happy in the US like a jilted ex. Angela chimed in that she felt like a jilted ex too! lol! she is unhinged.

        Angela is a Brexiter& MAGAt – Meghan being allowed to marry into the royal family & then ditching them is a total affront to her world views. She even said of the black choir during the wedding that it made her uncomfortable.

        Funny thing is William & Charles have spoken about misinformation & dangers of social media before but no issue with them of course.

      • Osty says:

        Yes o, the woman is so hurt that harry left her for Meghan and hasn’t forgiven them since . She is obsessed with harry and will act the fool anytime harry is mentioned
        In her pathetic mind, she believes harry would have been hers if “Meghan the witch didn’t brainwash him “

      • Greywacke says:

        LOL! Spit out my coffee, Snuffles.

      • Lorelei says:

        @Greywacke, I did too.

        @ABritGuest, I didn’t know that Eden admitted the whole “jilted exes” thing. It’s been so clear to us all along, but I never thought any of them would actually say it out loud! They’re so shameless in every way.

      • Donna B. says:


  13. Merricat says:

    She should get back in the clown car and leave.

  14. Amy Bee says:

    If there’s one person among the royal rota/commenters who is hurt the most by Harry leaving the UK, it’s Angela Levin.

    • Brit says:

      Her, Piers and Arthur Edwards seem the most deluded but it seems like everyone else is starting to become increasingly more unhinged. As time goes on and they lose more and more money and are ignored, the more obsessed they become.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        Let me fix it for you: As time goes on the more money they lose and the more money the Sussexes make, the more obsessed they become.

        These unhinged obsessed people would sell their souls to be a guest on an episode of an Archewell Audio podcast.

      • Snuffles says:

        I think most of the RRs are largely mad at the loss of income. In their minds, they’re furious they can’t profit off of the Sussex’s like they used to. And were quite frankly banking on being able to do so for the rest of their lives. They firmly believe that they should be getting a cut of the Sussex’s success because that’s been the deal they’ve had with the royal family for decades.

      • Lorelei says:

        @BTB and Snuffles, agreed.

        The thing about the current situation is that it is just not tenable, long term. Up until now, they’ve still been able to squeeze enough stories out of the nonexistent one-year “review” and they’ll have trial coverage, but the Sussex well is going to dry up for them completely at some point.

        That’s what I’m most interested in — seeing what happens when they reach a point of true desperation. Something has to give; they can’t go on this way much longer. The only viable option I can think of (thinking as a terrible person who cares only about tabloids making money), is turning completely on the Cambridges. There isn’t enough interest in any of the other family members (including, despicably, Andrew). But who knows. It will be interesting to see how it plays out.

        ETA: Wasn’t William able to block coverage of his affair with Rose using some EU “human rights” law? Once the UK is officially no longer part of the EU, I wonder what his plan is? It seems plausible to me that the tabloids know that this will happen sooner or later, and as soon as it does and William doesn’t have that avenue of defense (which must have been the best/only one his legal team had?) available to him anymore, they’ll be able to open up the floodgates on not just Rose but any stories of his infidelity that they’ve been holding back, which will help prop their revenue streams back up…

  15. Yoyo says:

    All these ‘so called experts’ are biting bullets, because every thing they said would happen to Harry and Meghan in the US , turned out to be a lie.
    It’s that 16 bathrooms and the millions that are keeping the clowns up at night.
    By the way Spotify is quite happy with their podcast and their third quarter exceeded expectations. Seth rogan, M Obama………..

  16. Elo says:

    It’s interesting that she thinks that keeping his “titles” is what is getting him lucrative deals.
    Like without his titles the world would forget whose son he is or who he as a person is. What bizarre thinking.

    • Lorelei says:

      Yes, because as everyone knows, the entire world completely lost interest in “Princess Diana” as soon as she was no longer an HRH 🙄

      They just don’t understand that no one outside of their small circle knows or cares about the intricacies of titles, styling, etc. In the US media, at least, they are always going to be “Prince Harry and Meghan Markle.” They just are. And interest in them will remain high no matter what archaic changes the Queen makes on paper back in her dusty old castle.

  17. Jane Doe says:

    I hope “carnival of experts” starts trending on several platforms.

  18. Kalana says:

    Angela Levin has embraced the Archie is a doll crowd on Twitter. She may be the most disturbed member of the carnival and it’s a tight race.

    The point is they’re still going to her for takes on anything. The ugliness of the harassment of the Palace and rota reminds me of what was directed at Diana and we know how that ended. It’s not possible to have two parallel paths where the press treats the other royals with deference and praise while harassing the Sussexes every step of the way.

    • Amy Too says:

      I don’t think it’s a coincidence that she is bringing up the “take away the titles! ……Because of this thing that he said awhile ago now, I guess,” right after we’ve found out that Meghan is only listed as the Duchess of Sussex on Archie’s BC. If her given names are taken off and she’s no longer the duchess of Sussex, she really has no connection to her baby on his birth certificate. I don’t believe the whole “they’re doing it so they can claim he doesn’t have a mother and then take him away” theory, because 1) the Queen is not legally allowed to take custody of her (great) grandchildren for no reason and 2) Meghan WAS the duchess of Sussex when Archie was born, so she would still be his mother now (it’s like when people get remarried after having children: the old name is on the BC but that doesn’t mean the baby is motherless now bc mom has a new name now)… I just think it’s about humiliating and erasing and distancing Meghan even further.

      • Lorelei says:

        @AmyToo, holy sh!t, that’s such a good point. I agree this is/was never about the Queen trying to take custody of Archie because hell would freeze over first, but this is something petty enough — yet still hurtful and insulting to Meghan — that I can absolutely see them thinking this.

        What sad lives these people have. Their days, thoughts and careers are consumed with trying as hard as they can to make two people who are an ocean away as miserable as possible at all times.

  19. Sofia says:

    She’s completely obsessed and unhinged.

  20. The Duchess says:

    This bizarre and deranged woman really needs to get a grip. This sort of mentality and unnecessary commentary is not helping the firm she’s representing every time she steps out of her cesspool to open that mouth of hers. The fish rots from the head and the bile she’s spewing is exactly what’s being discussed at the top of the British institutions. Harry is a free man, who has grown up surrounded by grief, misery and always being the fall-guy. Now he has the audacity to marry, break free and be the best example to his wife and son, they can’t get their heads around it. What did they think would happen? Harry would leave, then decide after a year to come right back and be the automatic whipping boy again? They continue to underestimate him and this will be their downfall. Angela is a disgrace, but the more she opens her mouth is the more that rotten firm is exposed for the racist, dysfunctional mess it is. Carry on because more and more sane people are waking up to this circus.


  21. Maliksmama says:

    I would love to understand this woman’s obsession with Harry. How and why it started. And why she thinks she knows the “real” Harry. Why isn’t she focused on the rest of the members of the BRF? Will and Kate need all the help they can get.

    • Sofia says:

      She wrote a book about him and talked to him for said book. She now thinks that because she’s done that, she’s the only who knows him.

    • BayTampaBay says:

      “Why isn’t she focused on the rest of the members of the BRF?”

      Because focusing on the rest the BRF will not get her writing gigs, speaking gigs and a chair on the chat shows.

      With the exception of Prince Charles to some degree, no one, even the diehard Royalists, are really interested in other members of the BRF for the simple reason that other members of the BRF really are not that interesting.

      • Harper says:

        I suspect we could get a VERY interesting biography of William but Prince Incandescent would make it very hard for any publishing company to put it on their list.

  22. sara says:

    every one of these crazy royal reporters is just showing themselves as a white supremacist over and over

  23. one of the Marys says:

    He and Meghan don’t lecture, they’re invited to speak or have a conversation and they do, and with depth as well. Does anyone claim Kate is lecturing about raising children or how about William lecturing about racism in sports? It’s very leading vocabulary as mentioned in another thread yesterday.
    I wonder if another reason they’re all so pressed about Harry’s speaking engagements is because the royals who remain can’t compete in that arena. They can copy a lot of their work style but they can’t perform this way and so they feel H&M have an unfair advantage in the comparison game. I doubt W&K are actually capable of this quality of speaking so it’s a moot point anyway but I wonder if their grievance is not so much that Harry can make these speeches as that they cannot?

  24. Ginger says:

    Angela Levin is such a nasty racist. I wish Harry could get a restraining order on her.

    • BayTampaBay says:

      No! Let Angela Levin just keep going on and on so if Harry is official asked to come back to the UK permanently he can realistically look at the asker and say, “Would you come back to Angela Levin?.

      Angela Levin, The Fail and many other of their cohorts are just grasping at straws to have something to talk about regarding the Royals that actually generate clicks and get people to tune-in the telly to view thereby being the Royals that really matter for their bottom line.

      Angela Levin could not care less about what the Countess of Wessex or The Princess Royal is doing or not doing because they do not effect the bottom line. How many books in the last three years have been written about Anne or Sophie? I rest my case.

  25. MeToforever says:

    Poor Harry will be paying for those 15 minutes spent talking to this unhinged woman for the rest of his life. She’s completely fixated on him the way Morgan is fixated on Meghan so good that H/M are thousands of miles away from those two humans.

  26. Mina_Esq says:

    In other words, she thinks Harry should give up his titles because he dared to marry a woman of color. Surely these people realize that we can see right through them.

  27. February-Pisces says:

    Saying ‘fascism and hatred’ is bad is like saying being a murder is bad. These are thing that should be universally condemned as the norm, yet we are living in a timeline where it’s now acceptable to be a disgusting hate filled racist, and saying it’s ‘bad’ is now disrespectful to their rights.

    Anyway the likes of Angela Levin are basically paid to slander harry and Meghan. They probably receive a cheque for every insult. I think we have to keep reminding ourselves of that. Even Keenbridge supporters on social media get paid by them, I remember when one troll revealed that by saying “atleast I’m getting paid for this”. I wonder how popular the Keens would really be if they didn’t have the RRs in their payroll.

    • BayTampaBay says:

      “Anyway the likes of Angela Levin are basically paid to slander harry and Meghan. They probably receive a cheque for every insult.”

      @February-Pisces – This is 95% of it and you are so correct.

      I doubt the RRs on the KP payroll but I have no doubt about existence of paid posters as I know of two people who are paid posters (not on Royals).

      • Lady D says:

        I’m curious as to the going rate for spewing bile and filth all day. Any idea what your acquaintances make, Bay?

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @Lady D – My friend is a retired Mechanical Engineer. Companies send him things (tools, Safety clothing, nuts, bolts, fittings, DIY manuals, etc,….) which he uses himself, gives to other engineer friends and/or test outs. My friend is then paid to go to web sites (there are a metric ton of these sites; some he chooses and some the companies recommend) where mechanical engineers & machinist hang out and talk about these products via posts. However, he is allowed to say anything he wants to say be it positive or negative about the products. He is not being paid to say good things about the products. He is being paid to “get the product out there” to people who would use the product. I would say that in a good year my friend makes about 10K a year for posting.

        I am sure there are people being paid to post nasty things about the Sussexes (and others) online at the Daily Fail and other sites. I am sure that whomever is paying looks for people who already Sussex Stalkers to recruit for this work.

  28. Lucylee says:

    And Harry thinks Angela should stop talking about him and INSTEAD focus on his brother fulfilling his duties as FFK.

  29. Bettyrose says:

    I’m not going to comment on the ongoing abuse. As an American tho I sort of love the idea of Harry joining our ranks.

  30. Original Jenns says:

    Pretty sure that war that the queen volunteered in (along with her sister and parents) and draws support from 75 gd years later was “political”. The nazis that attacked our Capitol are the same nazis that once goose stepped through Europe. But sure, white supremacy that murders people is too political.

    And isn’t lecturing people how to live from their ivory towers all that Will and Kate do??? At least Harry is trying to put his money where is mouth is, not creating false PR.

  31. HK9 says:

    Why do they keep talking….why??!!??

  32. Over it says:

    I can’t decide who is more unhinged, pierce,ingrid ,Angela or Becky these 4 are serious mental

    • Alexandria says:

      They must be serious fans though. We don’t even demand new pictures of Archie but they are so desperate to get in touch with HM I’m sure and they talk about them all the time. Huge fans. I’m sure they’ll push the Queen aside if they saw HM coming.

  33. MsIam says:

    Seems like a familiar pattern: the palace, Keens, etc. shows their asses and boom! here comes a “Strip the titles!” article from Angela, Piers, Dickie, etc. So predictable, yawn. I guess BP was getting to much heat about that change in the birth certificate, so lets bash Harry for saying water is wet. Even though they wanted to prop up William for allegedly being anti racism. So being anti hate speech and terrorism is being political but being anti racism is fine for a royal?

  34. L4frimaire says:

    Sigh…Angela Levin is the fumes the royal Rota runs on when they have completely run out anything useful to say. The carnival of so-called experts got their ass handed to them so here we go, back to Harry being too political, so strip his titles. When they’re trotting out the Levin the moon bump mama and old Scammy, you know they’ve hit rock bottom. I notice some stalkers out there on Twitter now demanding now to know when Meghan is going to speak out about Black History month or where the next podcast is. These trolls really can’t leave the Sussexes alone.

    • BayTampaBay says:

      @L4frimaire – Do you think it could be possible that there are more Sussex Stalkers and nasty old trolls than Sussex fans in the audience for Archewell Audio broadcast? I would not be surprised if this was true.

      • Becks1 says:

        I dont know if there are “more,” but their hatred and obsession definitely fuels the Sussex’s success. They’re buying the books, etc. For example, Finding Freedom was a NYT bestseller. That was definitely due to a lot of pro-Sussex people (like myself), and due to general royal interest, but it was also definitely due to the anti-Sussex people who cant keep their names out of their mouths, so to speak. they are so obsessed with the Sussexes that it would be funny if it werent so sad. They comment on everything, listen to their podcasts, watch all their video performances, etc. In some ways they drive their success because clicks and views are clicks and views, you know?

      • L4frimaire says:

        I don’t think so. I think most people are fans or just interested in them and their projects/ content. The haters though tend to be vocal and demanding, especially when they things don’t go their way. They don’t bring anything positive to contribute, which isn’t sustainable. They’re just loud and looking for any content to scream hypocrisy or titles or whatever. They really are annoying little pests.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        “In some ways they drive their success because clicks and views are clicks and views, you know?”

        @Becks1 – I agree with you 100%. This is exactly why The Daily Fail would run three Sussex stories a day if there were three Sussex stories a day to run. There are no longer Sussex stories to run so the Daily Fail must resort to hate-filled opinion pieces by Angela Levin & Piers Morgan to get clicks and views because click$ and view$ equal $$$$ and BPS.

        People who do not care do not click, view & post. Only fans, haters and paid trolls click, view and post.

      • Ginger says:

        There are A LOT more supporters than haters. Look at all the money the supporters raise for charities. The haters are just loud and are known to make multiple accounts.

  35. Susan says:

    I’m the kind of person that likes to take the piss out of someone attacking me: meaning if they say, “Susan, you’re a *&%$,” I’ll be like, “thank you for your feedback. Carry on,” as I have found over the years that engaging with proverbial pigs only gets you dirty as well. (No shade to the real animal, they are lovely)

    On that note, I wonder if M+H have ever thought, hell, let’s drop it all, call ourselves Harry and Meghan Windsor (or whatever surname) and totally erase the BRF from our identity. It would definitely kneecap all these British royal reporters’ money making off their name. It just feels like their move to US and virtual disappearance hasn’t changed the onslaught from the Brit reporters….and honestly, what WOULD change it?

    • Alexandria says:

      These are delusional, cruel and dumb clowns. Taking away their HRH would not make them stop talking about HM, I bet on it. They can’t help themselves.

      US media should invite people like Lainey and Celebitchy writers to talk about HM. I’m so glad HM does not need to use the rota rat racists anymore. That’s gotta burn.

  36. Abena Asantewaa says:

    What is really disappointing in all this , is the fact that The Queen, looks on silently, whiles all this abuse and harassments on her grandson and her granddaughter-in-law, go on relentless! What kind of family is this? I don’t think this is a good reflection on the queen, she is really running a bad household. For the queen, I say, the lights are on, but there is nobody at home. William is praised for his stands on racism, but Harry can’t say Black lives Matter. Title or no title , H&M will prosper. Angela Levin is a disturbed obssesed woman. I dare the queen to take away the titles, Harry is a blood Prince, not even the queen can strip him off his birthright, as a Prince.

    • Alexandria says:

      The funny thing is the royal family can have all the titles they want but why aren’t these clowns writing about them?

  37. equality says:

    A lot of reporters and other people need to stop commenting on US politics if you have to be a US citizen to do so. At least Harry will be paying taxes in the US. If you are helping to fund government, you should get to at least comment. Was Charles a Tibetan or Chinese citizen when he took a stance on their issues? Did he give up his titles to do so?

    • Lizzie says:

      Piers Morgan is not a US citizen and runs his big mouth about it everyday. Maybe he should quit his job and be run out of the country.

  38. Mrs.Krabapple says:

    Actually, the reason Harry should give up his title, is because it identifies him as belonging to a racist hate group that protects child rapists. No decent human being should want to be associated with THAT.

    • Susan says:

      I’m with you, Mrs. Krabapple. As I said earlier (much less eloquently), I see no benefit for them in having that affiliation with the BRF/British media. If they drop it all and become private US citizens, what do they lose? A family that stabs them in the back? Constant criticism about a non-existent role? Whatever status came along with having a title has clearly lost its luster.

    • Carmen-JamRock says:

      “Giving up his title” does not negate the IMMUTABLE FACT that Harry IS the SON of the next king of the UK; brother of the [perhaps, maybe, probably, sorta, kinda] future king of the UK; and son of a woman, now deceased, BUT! whom virtually EVERYONE. In. The. World. KNOWS!!! was PRINCESS DIANA, MOTHER OF THE [perhaps, maybe, probably, sorta, kinda] FUTURE KING of the UK; and EX-WIFE OF THE NEXT KING OF THE UK.

      In other words, “giving up his titles” wont change one scintilla of who Prince Harry is. Because having said titles, does not contribute one scintilla to his character.

      So, @mrskrabapple, how do you propose that Harry makes the world forget his heritage and that of his son, by simply “giving up his title”? One might as well suggest that he spins 3 times, saying: “be gone, be gone, be gone!”

      Because that will be just as effective in ending the ludicrousness of this argument.

      • anotherlily says:

        Yes! I’m sick of the ignorance displayed by supposed ‘experts’. Harry IS a Prince by birth and that cannot be taken from him. His hereditary dukedom cannot be taken either. Archie has a right in law to inherit the title of Duke of Sussex. Both Harry and Archie, and any subsequent child, are in the line of succession and that cannot be removed unless they become Roman Catholic.

        The Deprivation of Titles Act of 1917 applies only to those who are judged to have committed treason by supporting the UK’s enemies in wartime. We are not at war with the US.

        Harry was asked to not use the HRH style (which denotes a Prince or Princess) or the word ‘royal’ in his private business activities. However, Prince and Princess Michael of Kent have been using their HRH style and title in their business activities for the last 40 years. The Queen and Prince Charles both engage in business activities using their royal status, titles and insignia. The Queen makes money from her Sandringham Estate by selling a range of products to tourists including gin, tea, and chocolate. Charles developed the ‘Duchy’ label of organic groceries and trademarked the word ‘Duchy’. The profits help to support his Prince’s Trust charity.

        Harry and Meghan are the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and are free to pursue any business activities they choose under that identity.

    • Nyro says:

      Mugxit alert! Mugxit alert! This is the new thing now with them: calling for the Sussexes to have their titles removed under the guise of being anti-racist. And it’s so clearly a mugxit tactic because only a racist mugxit would accuse a black woman if supporting and fueling racism simply because she happened to marry a white man whose relatives are racist colonizing trash. Girl, you are too obvious. Stay mad and stay in your struggle.

      Harry is a blood prince. Denouncing his titles does absolutely nothing to change that. He’s already removed himself from that racist organization. He no longer works for them or represents them. Anyone calling for his and Mechanisms titles at this point is clearly a hater. You’re fooling no one, you clown!

  39. Kalana says:

    Just thinking about it -Are the Cambridges the only family members who don’t have any private ventures but live entirely off an allowance? Never mind the Sussexes being the outliers, is it actually the Cambridges again?

    The Cambridges can’t do anything because they want to be hands on parents while simultaneously complaining about pandemic exhaustion. But every other household has their private ventures. And the Queen clearly makes it up as she goes along without standards.

    Make the BRF do the dirty work of taking away whatever they can. If royal favor is all it takes, Andrew would have a Netflix deal. It burns them up inside that anything could matter more than the Queen’s approval.

    Voting isn’t controversial. That’s why Meghan was allowed to speak about it while still a working royal and William has also been able to speak about the ills of social media. Everyone knows Angela Levin is a crackpot and there is no controversy here.

  40. SenseOfTheAbsurd says:

    All of this is completely deranged, but one strand of derangement is the idea that royals, however tangential, can’t comment on any politics, anywhere. It’s a convention that they don’t take sides in British politics, because there’s a defined role for the monarch, who has to work with successive governments. The idea that this applies to American politics, where the BRF have no role, doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.

  41. Christine says:

    I truly don’t understand England. Hi, England! Every one of you that sings “God Save the Queen”, out loud, ever, is making a political statement. Period.

  42. Noor says:

    By remaining silent Buckingham Palace is complicit in allowing the tabloids drivel against Prince Harry and wife to continue unchallenged for so long and this may eventually affect the long term interest of the Royal Family .

  43. Angela Levin: carnival of so-called expert